Format Matters: Comparing the Inclusiveness and Effectiveness of Hybrid and Remote Meetings

5Citations
Citations of this article
9Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

The surge in remote and hybrid work has provided many benefits in terms of flexibility and autonomy, but it also presents challenges when it comes to team collaboration and meetings. Using a mixed-methods field study, we compare hybrid and remote meeting configurations to better understand how to improve the inclusiveness and effectiveness of these different meeting modalities. Our findings indicate that overall, fully-remote meetings are the most inclusive and effective. Fully-remote meetings are perceived as more inclusive of remote attendees despite their lower chat usage compared to hybrid meetings. We also find that people’s preferred format varies depending on the purpose or type of meeting and the skill set of the meeting moderator. We provide recommendations for improving meeting inclusion and effectiveness in both hybrid and remote meetings, such as training moderators and integrating chats with the main meeting.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Yarmand, M., Kreamer, L., Suri, S., & Jaffe, S. (2024). Format Matters: Comparing the Inclusiveness and Effectiveness of Hybrid and Remote Meetings. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 8(CSCW2). https://doi.org/10.1145/3686968

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free